Hi Chernyshev, Actually I have already posted a pull request for the test_monitor issue, and it has already been pulled by ianbarber!
Thanks to ianbarber for those pulls --- although I'm slightly disturbed by the fact that they happened like 30 seconds after I posted the requests. That doesn't seem like enough time for even Ian to verify that the patches worked as advertised. :P -Arthur, "trust but verify" On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Chernyshev Vyacheslav <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you. What do you think about other problems in test_monitor? I > will partially repeat my message posted in thread "Reporting make check > error". Do not want to create a pull request without discussing this > issue with others, even if it seems that issue is really present. > > First, memcmp returns zero if two byte strings are equal. We assert that > it is non-zero in all cases of test_monitor. So test passes only if two > byte strings are different everywhere. Is it really an intended > behaviour? Second, memcmp compares 22 bytes of memory, while addr char > array "tcp://127.0.0.1:5560" has only 20 bytes (not counting trailing > zero terminator) and it means that data_-><something>.addr can not have > more than 20 bytes too. memcmp does not stop like strcmp when it finds a > '\0' character, it simply compares passed amount of bytes. So we > definitely read memory that does not belong to us. > > As we do not know length of data_-><something>.addr in advance, probably > strcmp (or strncmp with upper limit of addr length) should be used in > this test case and at least some asserts must check whether strncmp(...) > == 0. > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
